Thanks, understood. We&#39;ll get the website update done and out of the way and get onto the additional board information updates.

Cheers ~ Ian

21st October 2006 02:31 PM

geo

RE: iSonic 87, 94 or 101

I edited my previous post in order to make it more clear.

Corrected "what a board is best at" with "in which conditions a board is at its best", which is conceptually different and more precisely separated from the other information "in which conditions a board is first choice".

Sorry, my English gets faulty when I am in a hurry.

20th October 2006 07:03 PM

mark h

RE: iSonic 87, 94 or 101

Thanks Ian, looks like a iS101 is on the xmas list.

Cheers

20th October 2006 06:46 PM

Ian Fox

RE: iSonic 87, 94 or 101

Hi Mark,

It&#39;s a good question, and one I was just thinking about the other day (having had a great iS101 session) - for ride, the iS101 has much more of the S100&#39;s versatile speed / range/ "do anything" potential; for "feel", well this is an interesting one as the feel of the iS101 is a little different to the S100- but in the same way the feel of the S100 was very good (and very popular) , the iS101 actually has (to my mind) an even better feel - but noting that the classic slalom board feel of the S100 is maybe slightly closer in iS94.

If you loved the S100, have an S125 and S90, are tall and heavy and want something 7.6/6.4 and occasional 5.8, iS101 for sure.

Might have to see if we can put together another iS megathread, then we can include some more board info as .g.e.o. suggested to add more description to the style/ride/handlling of each version.

Cheers ~ Ian

20th October 2006 02:32 PM

geo

RE: iSonic 87, 94 or 101

Ian,

thank you for your accurate answer.

I think it would be really useful for us the customers if Starboard (which of course means YOU in this case about iSonic boards) to provide two more informations: 1) for each board, in which conditions is it at its best; and 2) for each board, in which conditions it is first choice.
Just as an example: "iS xxx 1) is at its best at blasting and slalom racing in 15 to 25 knots and 2) is first choice for racing in gusty real world 15 to 20 knots wind and small to medium chop"; "iS xx 1) is at its best at speed blasting in 20 to 25 knots and 2) is first choice for racing or blasting in consistent 20 to 25 knots wind", or something the like.

20th October 2006 05:11 AM

mark h

RE: iSonic 87, 94 or 101

Hi Ian
Just save starting a new thread, could you tell me which, iS101 or iS94 rides/feels more like a 05 Sonic 100. I think the iS94 will feel smaller than my S100 and the iS101 will feel more similair, i think!!. I&#39;m tall and heavy and use NS Warp&#39;s, 7.6m, 6.4m and occassionally a 5.8m (but usually would be on my S90 by this time). Also got a S125 for 9m & 7.6m so I&#39;m thinking S90, iS101 & S125 (will switch to iS125 some time) will give me a better working range.

Thanks in advance

P.S. Would be good if all of the iS threads could be grouped together like last years massive/usefull iS thread.

19th October 2006 01:39 PM

Ian Fox

RE: iSonic 87, 94 or 101

Hi .g.e.o.

Considering, for this discussion that your range is spread across 15-25kts, (not 80% 25kts with only a few rare days below solid 20), then the 101 goes along way (more than the 105) into "traditional" 95 territory. Maybe also a lot of riders are getting used to the iS style, more familiar with the ride, and how to get the most from it - which is a slightly different style to the traditional. Most of us have a very positive rating for the "old" 95 - and we know from testing the new 94 actually tops it (95) by a narrow but noticeable margin. So it&#39;s no lemon.

If you had only one board to cover the 101-87 range, logically the 94 remains a very good choice as it really carries over some of the traditional "hi wind" ride/feel/handling, and it also is very competive with 6.6-7.6m conditions for your size. However for 2007 range, the 101 really extends so well into "95" territory (in most locations/conditions) that it becomes a pretty compelling choice when considered for your size in the 7.6/6.6m + 15-25kt range.

Obviously, the "advantage" to the 101 is seen more at the lower-mid end of the range, or in gusty or patchy conditions. While it flies off the wind, the iS style (101/105) has an advantage in "upwind" slalom angles as well over narrower slaloms.

Considering your strong feelings towards a more "traditional" slalom (S95 etc), the best suggestion is to try a demo ride on a 101 if at all possible. By all means try a 105, but the ride on the 101 is even more "95" than 105 (101=better hi speed trim across chop/ better jibe) - so be aware if you test 105.

It&#39;s only a calculated guess, but I think if you (only) try 105, you might VERY narrowly stay with 95 or 94, but if you try 101, then you would see enough potential that it would become your new choice. Not so much because 101 is a better board than 94, but because 101 fits and performs so well in the wind/sail/quiver range you discuss.

Cheers ~ Ian

18th October 2006 08:48 PM

geo

RE: iSonic 87, 94 or 101

Ian,

since we are here, and as a partial modification to my previous position. I see everybody is very happy about the 101 to the point that the older 100/95/94 heritage is almost out of discussion. Does that more traditional design still have any reason in the 2007 lineup?
I wish I had more (or at least: any!) opportunities to test different models. I used the 95 last season and I am very glad with it. I like its crisp ride, the superb way it handles chop, its ability to carry big sails when needed while still maintaining a "hiwind slalom" feel, its ability to carry a fully lit 6,6 (I mean when other people on freestyle/freeride/freewave materials do switch down from 5,8s to 5,2s), its overall performance. Is the 101 really such an hands down winner against that successful, though older, shape? Or, in simpler words: would I (191/85/15-25knots) better have to change?

18th October 2006 08:21 PM

Julian

RE: iSonic 87, 94 or 101

Ian, you made my day!

I hope to get my iSonic 111 next sunday, and then the long wait for the Code&#39;s will begin but as you said: they&#39;re worth the wait

Thanks again!

18th October 2006 06:34 PM

Ian Fox

RE: iSonic 87, 94 or 101

Hi Julian,

Sorry if it got more confusing that wasn&#39;t the plan..

The 87 and 111 are for sure a better spaced quiver (when you are concerned about light wind slalom also).

Maybe I misunderstood in your first post, when you made the comment about "optionallly missing the early planing" to mean you were interested to consider to sacrifice low end range in favor for mid to top end in this 101 vs 111 decision.
( a lot of GPS-SS guys, for example, would be in that "top end" mode).

So IF you were in that mode (seems that was wrong ?) then I would suggest looking at 101, as it does very well(relative) against 111 in light conditions (moreso with the active style - as described above) - and obviously has it over the 111 in mid to top end conditions. Plus, it&#39;s just a super sweet ride. Really fun as well as really fast.

But, in the case that you want to have some half decent light wind and good complimentary range to iS87, then for sure iS111 is better.
The difference with the 101 at the top end (crossover to 87) is that with 101/87, you would have more option to be on either 87 or 101; with 111/87 you will need to be more sure to be on the right board. If you were NOT interested in the light wind range of the 111 (but you are) , then my suggestion was to consider the 101/87.

With 75kg, the 101 will carry an 8.5 OK - but at the top end of the sail/board sweetspot. With 111 you will have a more in reserve for 8.5m conditions, and obviously 111 will be a better choice in these marginal conditions.

7.7 will get you started quite well even on 101, but with 111 you will get started with 7.7m even sooner than 101. No question.
The delay on the new Code:RED&#39;s might be a bit frustrating, but it will be worth it - the new ones are pretty special.

Hope this clears it all up, if not, well, let us know

Cheers ~ Ian

This thread has more than 10 replies.
Click here to review the whole thread.